Back to Messageboard | Home | Site Map  
 

Moulding society  
Posted by Craig Journeaux on February 12 2008, 22:31 » Uploaded 13/02/08 08:47  

Nothing is real, unless the 'evil media' say it is. Take the recent derby involving the two teams from Manchester for example. The media coverage leading up to this game was drenched in a demand for sympathy and respect for those who died in the Munich air disaster. This being the 50th anniversary it was apparently even more important.

The minute's silence that was planned for the game itself was the subject of most of this demand for respect. Those suspected of not doing were branded as chavs, hooligans, ignorant and indicative of everything that is wrong with society. The minutes silence went ahead and it was 'impeccably observed'.

But it wasn't real. In truth it was never observed. The silence was not real, it was fake, a plastic silence. This media fuelled demand for respect had aided the creation of a false reality, one in which the desired outcome was enforced in order to manage the apparent truth, the reality. Why? Because as well as the constant moral guidance we were fed by right minded journalists and politicians, threats to name and shame those who did not respect the silence and a wall of ignorance from those who refused to listen to any views which went beyond the socially constructed morality that guides us to respect things such as a public mourning, fans were informed that should they choose to disrespect the silence they would be banned from both football clubs for life. What occurred in that football ground on Sunday was not respect but fear. It was not real but fake. It was not the truth, it was a false reality.

Had it of been disrespected this would have been fake also. The notion of a minutes silence should have never been allowed to infect football culture in the first place. People die everyday. Yet there is no public mourning for them and no media outcry at the state of society for the lack of respect given to them in the realm of the public. When a dead celebrity dies or footballer is given a minutes silence, respect is demanded, and any questioning of this demand is labelled with a spurious and simplistic understanding of morality, one which is socially constructed and as far from the truth as is the respect given to it. Because in truth, when you enforce your own morals on a culture you shouldn't be surprised if the existing morals of that culture reject them and resent being told they must respect them. On the surface it is disrespectful to act in a way which may upset those who want to mourn. But those who want too are free to mourn in private and with those who wish to mourn with them; just as is everyone else when they feel the need to mourn. Enforcing this mourning on others removes any truth in the notion of ignoring this demand as disrespect.

Each supporter was also given a free scarf to hold up during the silence and throughout the game. This looked amazing and contributed to the atmosphere. But it was not real. It was constructed in order to meet the desired effect. It would have been real if people had brought their own scarves and held them up. It would look the same but this time it would be real as it was not constructed.

This is the Media's contribution to the prophylaxis of football culture. The media aid this control of and eradication of existing norms through their demands for certain forms of behaviour, with outrage when their own morality is ignored and by labelling people, such as me, with blanket terminology like chav scum for ignoring these demands. This media driven social and cultural cleansing exists not just in football culture but in society in general.

COMMENTS Post comment

 

Comment 01 – Zoidbug February 13 2008, 17:04

IMO it is not "respect" which is being demanded in these rituals (no one can "demand" respect), but a public display of conformity. Just not, of course, the conditional, spontaneous, voluntary, limited and joyous expressions of conformity usually seen at sports events.

I'm at least a little bit encouraged that absolute conformity by the stadium-load has to be so strenuously produced and micro-managed with inducements and threats. Even for just one minute!

Comment 02 – TrueRed February 13 2008, 19:59

Some poor points made. The reason why these kind of individuals get more public spotlight in terms of minutes silence is because they're in the public spotlight. Its not a case of making one persons life more important than the next, its just a fact their life was more of a higher profile.

You're basically saying that people should forget any historical events thats happened previously? I'm sure you'll disagree of the minutes silence for the rememberance sunday service in and around the 11th of November each year? Judging from your opinion they're just soldiers, just another normal member of the public therefore we shouldn't pay homage to them?

Showing compassion & a little respect isn't fake nor conforming to the media. Some of us do care about history & whats happened in the past and how that past has shaped the future. Respect being the key point. If you dont agree with it, don't spoil it for the ones that do.

Comment 03 – Craig Journeaux February 13 2008, 23:19

Being in the public spotlight is not a reason for, it is an excuse too. 'Being in the public spotlight' doesn't answer the points raised in the original thread any more than stating that 'some people want to mourn'. Being in the realm of the public may mean there are more people who are aware of the deaths than there may be if an elderly women with no friends died; but that is not reason enough to enforce a public display of mourning onto the public. A choice should be given to those who wish to mourn to do so. As it is, the mourning was enforced and the respect demanded.

You are answering points that i have not raised here, answering questions that where not asked in order to twist the argument into one in which you are able to defend a point. The dead soldiers have nothing to do with what happened on Sunday. Sunday was about a few footballers who most people there never knew, or had no connection too, or felt nothing for. And why should they? (Although, even a minutes silence for dead soldiers is questionable if it is enforced).

You see, by asking me not to spoil it for you, you assume you have the correct moral stance here. But you fail to offer any reasons why i should respect it other than to satisfy your own morality. Your argument would only work if i invaded your private mourning space and refused to show you respect. As it is, this is what you are in fact doing to me when you demand my respect; you are showing no respect for my own desire to enjoy the freedom of social space and the culture which occupies it without having to [as somebody else has just put it] conform.

Imagine a room called reality. In this room there are certain words and sentences. You use these words and sentences to construct an understanding of the space that surrounds the room. Now imagine a room called the truth. You do the same but you have an unlimited amount of words and sentences in which to construct your understanding. What you, and the media do, is to limit your ability to understand this particular topic through your refusal to leave the room which we have just called reality.

Comment 04 – TrueRed February 14 2008, 16:55

You wouldn't know reality if it came & bit you on the arse.

Comment 05 – Craig Journeaux February 15 2008, 19:43

Typical response. You continue to read the views of those who you already agree with and criticise the views of those you don't try to understand, mate. ;-)

 

 

 

 

Post comment

   
Name:
Email:  
Display email
address?
  Don't display    Display
Lifespan of comment   Delete after 3 weeks    Keep permanent if post is permanent  

Comment:

 
Optional link URL:
eg "http://mediahell.org"
 
Optional link text:
eg "Media Hell"
 
 

 

  Messageboard Back to top